plea to the jurisdiction denied
Generally, a party can maintain a suit to determine its rights without legislative permission as long as damages
are not sought. Federal Sign v. Texas Southern University, 951 S.W.2d 401, 404 (Tex. 1997). Here, the Trust
argues that the State is acting without legal or statutory authority in claiming title to the sand and gravel
because the waterway is not navigable. So too does it seek declaratory relief to adjudicate whether the river is
navigable and, if it is not, injunctive relief to prevent further interference with its use of same. A declaratory
judgment action seeking the determination of a disputed fact issue, to wit: whether the Salt Fork of the Red
River is a navigable waterway as it passes through the Trust's property, is not a suit against the State that
implicates sovereign immunity. Although it may have the collateral consequence of resolving a factual dispute
that impacts a claim being made by the State, it is not an action that is in essence one for the recovery of
money from the State or for determination of title; therefore, legislative permission to prosecute it is
unnecessary. See Cobb v. Harrington, 144 Tex. 360, 190 S.W.2d 709, 712-13 (1945) (in which the court was
asked to determine by declaratory judgment whether the parties were motor carriers as defined by the tax
statute which the court found not to be a suit against the state). We voice no opinion on any other cause of
action within the live pleading, however.
Accordingly, we cannot say that the trial court erred in denying the Department's plea. Additionally, the order
denying that plea is affirmed.
07-0945
TEXAS PARKS AND WILDLIFE DEPARTMENT v. THE SAWYER TRUST; from Donley County; 7th district
(07‑06‑00487‑CV, ___ SW3d ___, 08‑22‑07)
This is an interlocutory appeal from the trial court's denial of a plea to the jurisdiction filed by the Texas Parks
and Wildlife Department. We affirm.